REWAS 2013 pp 202-216 | Cite as

Critical Analysis of Existing Recyclability Assessment Methods for New Products in Order to Define a Reference Method

  • E. Maris
  • D. Froelich


The designers of products subject to the European regulations on waste have an obligation to improve the recyclability of their products from the very first design stages. The statutory texts refer to ISO standard 22 628, which proposes a method to calculate vehicle recyclability. There are several scientific studies that propose other calculation methods as well. Yet the feedback from the CREER club, a group of manufacturers and suppliers expert in ecodesign and recycling, is that the product recyclability calculation method proposed in this standard is not satisfactory, since only a mass indicator is used, the calculation scope is not clearly defined, and common data on the recycling industry does not exist to allow comparable calculations to be made for different products. For these reasons, it is difficult for manufacturers to have access to a method and common data for calculation purposes.

A critical analysis of the standard and the various calculation methods identified in scientific journals was performed. An initial discussion brought to light several possible scopes of calculation. Additional indicators, such as quality loss or economic value loss, would be complementary to the mass indicator. Case studies were performed to compare these different methods. A new method and its scope of calculation are proposed in order to develop a reference method.


ELV: End-of-life vehicle

WEEE: Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment

PRM: Primary raw material

SM: Secondary material

SRM: Secondary raw material


Recyclability standard ecodesign 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Standard ISO 22 628. 2002–02–15. Road vehicles, Recyclability and recoverability, Calculation method.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M.A., Reuter et al., 2006/4. Fundamental limits for the recycling of end-of-life vehicles. Minerals Engineering, 19(5): 433–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Huisman, A.L.N. Stevels and I. Stobbe. 2004. Eco-efficiency considerations on the end-of-life of consumer electronic products. IEEE Transactions on Electronics Packaging Manufacturing, 27(1): 9–25.2004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. van Schaik et al.. 2004. The influence of particle size reduction and liberation on the recycling rate of end-of-life vehicles. Minerals Engineering, 17(2): 331–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M.B. Castro et al., Simulation model of the comminution–liberation of recycling streams: Relationships between product design and the liberation of materials during recycling. International Journal of Mineral Processing, 2005/2/7Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. Froelich et al., 2007. State of the art of plastic sorting and recycling: Feedback to vehicle design. Minerals Engineering, 20(9): 902–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Robert U. Ayres. Metals recycling: economic and environmental implications, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 1997Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    G. Villalba et al., 2004/10/1. Using the recyclability index of materials as a tool for design for disassembly. Ecological Economics, 50(3–4): 195–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    G. Villalba et al., 2002/12. A proposal for quantifying the recyclability of materials. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 37(1): 39–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    S.H. Amini et al. 2007. Quantifying the quality loss and resource efficiency of recycling by means of exergy analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15(10): 907–913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    M.B.G. Castr et al., Exergy losses during recycling and the resource efficiency of product systems Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2007 11.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    O., Ignatenko, A. van Schaik and M. A. Reuter, Exergy as a tool for evaluation of the resource efficiency of recycling systems. Minerals Engineering, 2008Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    O. Ignatenko, A.van Schaik and M.A. Reuter, Recycling system flexibility: the fundamental solution to achieve high energy and material recovery quotas; Journal of Cleaner Production, 2007Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. van Schaik, M.A. Reuter, The time-varying factors influencing the recycling rate of products. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2004/3Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    M.B.G. Castro et al., A thermodynamic approach to the compatibility of materials combinations for recycling. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2004/12 5.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    J. Huisman, C.B. Boks and A.L.N. Stevels, Quotes for environmentally weighted recyclability (QWERTY): Concept of describing product recyclability in terms of environmental value. International Journal of Production Research. 2003Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    L. Flahaut et al, Etude pour une filière de recyclage des déchets d’équipements électriques et électroniques sur le territoire national.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© TMS (The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society) 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Maris
    • 1
  • D. Froelich
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire Conception Production InnovanteInstitut Arts et Métiers ParisTech de ChambéryFrance

Personalised recommendations